Jeoloji Münendisliği Dergisi
Jeoloji Mühendisliği Dergisi

Jeoloji Mühendisliği Dergisi

2003 HAZİRAN Cilt 27 Sayı 1
COVER
View as PDF
COPYRİHT PAGE
View as PDF
CONTENTS
View as PDF
Isotop Hydrology Studies Of Beypazarı. Trona Mine Area,Ankara
Cahit Özgür Osman Gökmenoğlu Barbaros Erduran
View as PDF

ABSTRACT: Trona mine located in the Beypazarı city? and surrounded by the Başören, Bağözü and Çakıloba villages,, overlays an area of 9 km" approximately. Aim of the study is to investigate the probable hydro geology events during the mine management and determine solutions. Karadoruk and Çakıloba Formations are aquifers, concordancely overlaying the Hırka Formation in which Trona has occurred. These units are confined aquifers on areas bounded by discontinuities,, Trona mine area is divided to two sectors, Elmabeli and Anseki according to the Hydrogeologie events,. Hydrogeological explorations have been carried out during 1984-1986 and 2000-2001, in the mentioned area. As a result of the studies,, groundwater flow in the Elmabeli Sector is towards the K-25 spring (towards the shearing zone of the Zaviye and Kanhceviz Faults), and the average flow rate is 10-13 mfday. Groundwater flow in the Anseki Sector is towards the Zaviye Fault with an average raM, of 8-15 m/day. Ground-waters located in the area are found to be of shallow circulation and similar origin » due to the evaluation of the 34 water samples collected front 19 different locations durind the wet and dry season periods. Brine saples result as deep circulation components.

  • rona

  • Isotope

  • Brine

  • Anderson, M., William, W.., 1992, Applied Groundwater Modelling,, Academic Press Inc., San Diego, California, USA

  • Apha-Awwa-Wpcf, 1981, Standart Methods For The Examination Of Water and. Wastewater, American Puplic Healt Assosation, Washington, U..S.A.

  • Atalay, Ü, Hiçyılmaz, C, Örgiil, S.,, 2001, Beypazarı Trona Cevherinden Soda Külü Üretimi Koşullarının Saptanması,, Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi, Ankara

  • Aziz, A., 1976, Beypazan-Yeni Çayırhan ve Karaköy Arasındaki Sahanın Jeolojisi ve Bitümlü Şist olanakları, Maden. Tetkik, ve Arama Genel Müdürlüğü, Derleme No:5732, Ankara

  • Castany, C, 1969, Yeraltı suları hakkında Pratik Uygulamalar (Çev; K. Karacadağ), DSİ Yayınları, Genel Yayın No: 638

  • Clark, D., Fritz, P., 1987, Environmental Isotopes in Hydrogeology, USA

  • Erol, O.,, 1955, Körogju- Işık` Dağlan Volkanik Kütlesinin Orta Bölümleri île Beypazarı Ayaş Arasındaki Neojen Havzasının Jeolojisi Hakkında Rapor, Maden Tetkik ve Arama Genel Müdürlüğü, Derleme No:2274, Ankara

  • Fetter, C, W., 1980, Applied Hydrogeology, University of Winconsia, USA.

  • Gökmen, V., 1965, Nallıhan-Beypazarı Civanndaki Linyit İhtiva Edeo Neojen Sahasının Jeolojisi Hakkında Rapor, Maden Tetkik ve Arama Genel Müdürlüğü, Derleme No:3802, Ankara

  • Göktunab, BL, 1963, Beypazarı Linyitlerinin Jeolojik Etütleri Hakkında Rapor, Maden Tetkik ve Arama Genel Müdürlüğü, Derleme No:3391, Ankara

  • Helvacı, C, İnci, U., 1989, Beypazarı • Trona Yatağının Jeolojisi, Mineralojisi, Jeokimyası ve Yörenin Trona Potansiyeli, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık. Fakültesi Jeoloji Mühendisliği Bölümü, İzmir

  • Kayakıran, S., Çelik., E., 1986, Beypazarı Trona (Doğal Soda) Yatağı Maden Jeolojisi Rapora, Maden Tetkik ve .Arama Genel Müdürlüğü » Derleme No:8079, Ankara ••

  • Keh.In.de, M. O.,. 1993, Preliminary îsotopic Studies in the Bida Basın, Central Nigeria, Environmental Geology, Volume 22, Washington, USA, 212-217 p.

  • Kesserii, Mine Water Problems and Some Special Solutions In. Hungary, S:15, Hungary

  • Korkmaz, N., 1991, Ankara-Beypazan Soda (Trona) Sahası Yeraltı suyu Bilançosu Raporu, Devlet Su işleri Genel Müdürlüğü Jeoteknik Hizmetler ve Yeraltı, suları Dairesi Başkanlığı, Ankara

  • Knısemamı, G., P., Ridder, N., A.,, 1982, Hidrojeolojik Pompaj Verilerinin Analiz, ve Değerlendirilmesi {Çev. Prof. Dr., R. Dilek)

  • Özgür, C», Tamg^ç, F., 1986, Ankara. Beypazarı Soda (Trona) Yatağının Hidrojeoloji İncelemesi, Maden • Tetkik, ve Arama Genel Müdürlüğü,,, Derleme No:8101, Ankara.

  • Özgjir, C, Erduran, B., 1999, Beypazarı Trona Sahası Galeri Güzergahında Yapılan. Hidrojeoloji Çalışmalarına Ait Ön Rapor Ve Tüm. Sahayı Kapsayan. Hidrojeoloji Çalışmalarıyla İlgili öneri Ve Teklifler, Maden Tetkik ve Arama Genel Müdürlüğü Enerji Ham

  • Özgiir, C, Gökmenoğlu, ` O., Erduran B., 2002, Ankara Beypazarı Trona Sahası Hidrojeoloji Etüdü Raporu, MTA Genel Müdürlüğü, Derleme No: , Ankara

  • Siyako, F., 1983, Beypazarı Ankara Kömürlü Neojen Havzasının Çevresinin Jeolojisi,, Maden Tetkik ve Arama Genel Müdürlüğü, Derleme No:7431 » Ankara

  • Stchepinsky, V., 1942, Beypazan-Nalhhan- Bolu-Gerede Bölgesi Jeolojisi Hakkında Rapor, Maden Tetkik, ve Arama Genel Müdürlüğü,,, Derleme No: 1363, Ankara

  • Yurtsever, Y., (1978), Environmental Isotopes As a ` Tool In Hydrogeological Investigation of Southern Karst Region of Turkey, Procedings Of a International Seminar on Karst Hydrogeology, Antalya, Turkey

  • Walton, W,, G., 1970, Groundwater Resource Evaluation, International Student Edition, USA

  • Zïfgkr, K.GJ., 1939, Hırka (Beypazarı) ve Karaköy Nallıhan. Havalisindeki Bitümlü Şistler, Maden Tetkik ve Arama Genel Müdürlüğü, Derleme No: 985, Ankara



  • Özgüm, C , Gökmenoğlu, O , Erduran, B . (2003). Ankara, Beypazarı Doğal Soda Trona Sahası İzotop Hidrolojisi Çalışmaları . Jeoloji Mühendisliği Dergisi , 27 (1) , 3-16 . Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/jmd/issue/52392/686355

  • Özgüm, C , Gökmenoğlu, O , Erduran, B . Ankara, Beypazarı Doğal Soda Trona Sahası İzotop Hidrolojisi Çalışmaları. Jeoloji Mühendisliği Dergisi 27 (2003 ): 3-16

  • General Evaluation Of Energy Resources Of Turkey
    Güner Ünalan
    View as PDF

    ABSTRACT: Only 31 % of the energy requirement of Turkey has been supplied by the known reserves and production of the primary energy resources in the country, the rest, 69 % is imported as oil, natural gas and hard coal. According to the future projections, the ratio of the domestic supply will decrease to 25 % in .20.20. The most important two energy resources of Turkey are the hydroelectric energy and lignite,. The total economic potantial in hydroelectric energy is 126 billion kWh and- technical potantial is 216 billion kWh. Today, the average production potential is 44 billion kWh which equals to 12250 MW and corresponds to 35 % of the economic potential, 20 % of the techni .^al potential During the last 50 years, if Turkey had been capable of using bigger part of its Hydroelectric potential today it would have met almost all electric energy need (130 billion kWh) from this resources and it would not have had to import natural gas, oil and hard, coal for this purpose. Our total lignite reserve is 8,3 billion tons.. 69 % of this reserve has lower than `2000 kCal/kg calorific value. So, bigger portion of this resource is suitable for using in thermic power plants,. Yearly production of lignite in Turkey is between 50 and 60 million tons and 85 % of the production is consumed- in thermic power plants which have a total installed capacity of 6500 MW. These power plants produced about 34 billion kWh in 200L On the other hand,, the total lignite reserve of Turkey suitable for electricity production is calculated as Ï05 billion kWh. This means that only 32 % of total potential could be used so far. The unique hard coal deposit of Turkey is in Zonguldak (North of Turkey). The total reserve is 1,1 billion ton.. The coal mining has many difficulties because of the complicated geological structure of the area. Although the reserve seems to be important, the production is being only 2,3 million tons/year for a few years.. Because of low production comparing to the demand, Turkey is importing hard, coal in increasing amount every year., In case of using of ail the hard, coal reserve for electricity, 16 billion kWh could be proueed. Today, the production front the hard coal is only 4 billion kWh (480 A4W)„ The total electricity production capacity of three energy resources mentioned above (126+105+16) is 247 billion kWh equivalent This value is almost double of today`s electricity consumption of Turkey. But only 32 billion kWh part of this has been produced. Other primary resources, crude oil and natural gas fields are concentrated in SE Anatolia and Thrace, but the production is far from the covering of the consumption. The oil and natural gas import of Turkey has been increased every year with larger amount In 2002, 2,4 million tons crude oil was produced, 29,6 million tons were consumed. Natural gas production was 407 million m3 and consumption was 17,7 billion m3.. Little production of asphaltite from two areas in SE Anatolia is used locally for heating.. Apart front hydroelectrical energy, other renevable resources such as geothermal wind •and. solar energy are also important resources but all these have only 4 % share in our total primary energy production. Occurences of uranium, thorium and oil shales have been known in Turkey, but there is no production of these resources, Uranium deposits occur in Western Anatolia,, but their grades are low. Only one thorium deposit is in Eskişehir-Beylikahır. There are .some technological problems for process. The oil shales are also situated in western Anatolia, Their calorific values are low and they have some production difficulties, Turkey has not been explored in the real sense for energy resources as well as other ore deposits. The coal explorations made so far are not much more than "outcrop mining" and that`s why the potential in the `"covered areas`" has not been known. Because coal is a productofa sedimentary basin,, the basin should be examined as a whole.. But the minig laws, including the 3213 law in force, describes the exploration fields within the mining claim areas which is contrary the basin idea, The exploration of cranium and thorium has not been realized for more than 15 years and the expioration team was broken up. `There has not enough drilling for oil and- natural gas exploration. Similar situation also appears for other energy resources.. The primary things should be done which are as follows: MTA is a resposible organization for exploration of all energy resources except oil and hydroeiectrical energy which sould be supported by young personnel and appropriate equipment, these personnel, should be trained quickly for exploration in basins as mentioned above, the mining law should be rearranged for a new exploration attack independent to the mining claim areas in certain .After doing all of these,, new resources and new reserves are expected to be found

  • Lignite

  • Energy Hardcoal

  • Asphaltite

  • Oilshale

  • Aybers,N., 1994, Türkiye 6.Enerji Kongresi,. Nükleer Enerji Paneli konuşması, İzmir.

  • Bilici,, U,, 2002, Toryum varlığımız: TMMOB, Maden Müh. Odası Madencilik Bülteni,, 64, s.43.

  • DEK, 1999, Enerji Raporu: Dünya Enerji Konseyi, Türk Milli Komitesi yayını

  • DEK,2002, 2002 Türkiye Enerji Raporu: Dünya Enerji Konseyi,Türk Milli Komitesi yayını

  • DPT, 2001; 8.. Beş Yıllık Kalkınna Planı, Madencilik, özel ihtisas Komisyonu Raporu, Kömür Çalışma Grubu Ankara.

  • DSİ, 2002, DSİ ve Hidroelektrik -Enerji, DSİ`nin Tanıtımı (Kerem broşürleri).

  • Ercömert, T.,, 2002, Türkiye`de hidroelektrik enerji: Enerji Dünyası, DEK, Türk Milli Komitesi Bülteni, 44,s.. 29-32

  • Eroğlu, V.., 2003, Ülkemizin hidroelektrik üretim potansiyeli ve yakın gelecekteki önemi: Türkiye 9; Enerji Kongresi Bildirileri, Cilt II, s. 95-115.

  • ETKB, 2003, 2001 ve 2002 yılları Genel Enerji Dengesi tablosu...

  • Işıganer, T., 1985, Silopi (Harbul-Üçkardeşler) asfaltit fılonlannın jeolojisi: MTA Rapor No.,7762.

  • Kaya, M., 2003, Yeni nükleer arayışlar Toryum gerçeği: Enerji Dünyası,, DEK, Türk Milli Komitesi Bülteni, 45, s,. 39-44.

  • Lebkuchner, R.R, Orhun, F., Wolf, M., 1972,, Asphaltic substances in Southeastern Turkey: AAPG Bull,., 56, 1939-1964.

  • Mertoğlu, ö., 2002, Türkiye`de jeotermal enerji:- Enerji Dünyası, DEK, Türk Milli. Komitesi Bülteni, 45, s.26-38.

  • Önal, G.., 2003, 21. Yüzyılın güvenilir enerji kaynağı kömür: Türkiye 9.. Enerji Kongresi Bildirileri,,, Cilt I I , S. 9-1.4..

  • Önal, G. ve Çallı, L., 2002, Kömür: Yurt.Madenciliğini Geliştirme Vakfı yayını

  • Öz, D., 1994,,, Turba ve turbiyerlerin genel tanıtımı, etüdü ve Türkiye turbiyerlerinin coğrafik lokaliteleri: MTA raporu..

  • Özer, Z,, 1996, Biyotitle enerjisi: Tübitak, Bilim, ve Teknik Dergisi, 342, s.56-61..

  • Özerdem, B.,,t 2003, Türkiye`de rüzgar enerjisi uygulamalarının gelişimi ve geleceği : Türkiye 9. Enerji Kongresi Bildirileri,,, cilt II, s. 167-175.

  • Pasin, S, ve Altınbilek, D., 1997, Türkiye`de hidroelektrik enerji ve gelişme durumu: Türkiye 7. Enerji Kongresi tebliğleri, cilt 3,8.1-26.

  • Pasin, S..,2002, Dünyada ve Türkiye`de hidroelektrik potansiyelin gelişimi: Enerji Dünyası, DEK, Türk Milli Komitesi bülteni, 41,,s.46~55.,

  • PİGM, 2001, Petrol Faaliyetleri; Petrol İşleri Genel Müdürlüğü Dergisi, No.. 46.

  • Sağdık» IL, 2003, Türkiye`de toryum üretimi için yapılması gereken ön çalışmalar: Enerji Dünyası, DEK, Türk Milli Komitesi bülteni, 46-47, s.. 40-41.

  • Satman, A., 2002, 4.. Petrol Şurası, PUIS Eğitim yayınları 6, s. 166.,

  • Tuncah, E,., Çiftçi,,, B., Yavuz, N.,, Toprak, S., Köker, A., Gencer, 2., Aycık, H. ve Şahin, N., 2002, Türkiye Tersiyer kömürlerinin kimyasal ve teknolojik özellikleri: MTA yayını Ankara,

  • Ültanır, M.Ö., 1993,,, 21,. yüzyıla girerken Türkiye`nin enerji stratejisinin değerlendirilmesi: Yayıo No; TUSİAD/98-12/239.

  • Ünalan, G., 1939, Türkiye`de madenciliğin ekonomideki yeri ve önemli maden yataklarımız: MTA raporu.,

  • Ünalan, G., 1990, Aperçu général sur les gisements de houille, de lignite, d`asphaltite et des schistes bitumineux.:: MTA raporu.

  • Ünalan, G..,, 1994, Türkiye`nin enerji kaynakları: TMMOB, Jeoloji Müh. Odası yayın No. 40.



  • Lan, G . (2003). Türkiye Enerji Kaynaklarının Genel Değerlendirmesi . Jeoloji Mühendisliği Dergisi , 27 (1) , 17-44 . Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/jmd/issue/52392/686353

  • Lan, G . Türkiye Enerji Kaynaklarının Genel Değerlendirmesi. Jeoloji Mühendisliği Dergisi 27 (2003 ): 17-44

  • Geotechnical Aproach For Energy Of Ecemiş Valley
    Yasemin Leventeli İlyas Yilmazer
    View as PDF

    ABSTRACT: Ecemiş Fault corridor includes huge landslides with several billions cubic meters, along Pozantı - Çamardı trough The trinity water-discontinuity-clay (WDC) is the main cause of geotechnical problems, The trinity WDC is well developed in this trough and plays a significant role in the formation of these landslides,. However, this trinity has created appreciably fertile lands for fanning. The Kamıştı dam, designed by the DSI (State Hydraulic Works), is on the downstream part of the Ecemiş corridor.. Upon the construction of this dßm, the extensive unstable masses on slopes of the reservoir will slide in to the dam to finish the economic life of the project. The conventional dams, as suggested by the DSI, destroy and/or burry natural and historical monuments forever. Besides thai, such dams change the prevailing climate.. In general, the dams with a wide reservoir lake inhibit snowfall and thus reduce subsurface infiltration. However, the proposed pressure pipeline system, has many advantages in terms of timing, environment safety-security and cost (TESC). It can generate more energy with less cost and saves the environment. The recommended project pressure pipe system consists of S small dams on the tributaries» S regulators on Ecemiş stream., S pipelines, ^ power plants.

  • Geotechnics

  • Ecemiş

  • Water-discontinuity-clay (WDC)

  • Timingenvironment- safety-cost (TESC)

  • Pressure pipeline



  • Leventeli, Y , Yılmazer, î . (2003). Ecemiş Vadisi Enerjisi İçin Jeoteknik Yaklaşım . Jeoloji Mühendisliği Dergisi , 27 (1) , 45-55 . Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/jmd/issue/52392/686357

  • Leventeli, Y , Yılmazer, î . Ecemiş Vadisi Enerjisi İçin Jeoteknik Yaklaşım. Jeoloji Mühendisliği Dergisi 27 (2003 ): 45-55

  • ISSUE FULL FİLE
    View as PDF